19920166 Ver al_Complete File_19920529

.,0 S
e r??+
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor -Margaret Plemmons Foster
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary [ cdooRl ager
Division of Environmental ManagemenLU mn
Water Quality Section
May 23, 1992 MAY 2 9 'vr
-ViETLA M
M E M O R A N D U M WATER UA! Ii't
To:John Dorney/Eric Galamb
Thru:M. Steven Mauney
From:James C. Watson
Subject:401 Certification Review
NCDOT, Replace Bridge #32 on SR 1672
# 92166
Forsyth County
It does not appear that this proposed project
would have a significant impact on the stream, as this
is a bridge replacement.
I discussed the bridge replacement with Ms.
Michelle James, project engineer, DOT, and she informed
me that the replacement is approximately two (2) years
away.
Grassy Creek is classified a class "C" at this
location. This would be suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing wildlife, and
secondary recreation.
Recommendation:I recommend approval of the project.
WSRO
IOF
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Winston-Salcm, N.C. 271063203 • Telephone s iKXX [phone]
[phone] FAX

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
April 13, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steve Mauney
FROM: John Dorney ??--
3
RE: 401 Certification Review
.
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
APR 16 M.
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Please review the enclosed 401 Certification applications by May 13, 1992. Please
call me if you or your staff have any questions, or need assistance in these reviews.
0 NCDOT, Replace Bridge #32 on SR1672
#92166
Forsyth County
2. NCDOT, Replace Bridge #18 on NC88
#92164
Ashe County
3. NCDOT, Replace Bridge #28 on SR1301
#92171
Surry County
4. NCDOT, Replace Bridge #5 on NC88
#92170
Ashe County
5. NCDOT,Replace Bridge #140 on SR2061
#92177 -
Surry County
The other enclosed material (if any) is for your general information and use as
appropriate.
Enclosure AS3
F. t?ATE
37 u .--? 1
;?:??IED TO
LIE D A T C

?7yd?`s?q
N_ rM?M
1. 1
STATE OF NORTH CAROU
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
March 20, 1992
3 019
,7,,,,-OF HIGHWAYS
WETIkt,:?
MATER QUALITY SEC?
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
District Engineer s APB' Z?, a Z ?'??-,
Army Corps of Engineers ?rnV;; & y tz
P. 0. Box 1890 S/20/?jZ
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir: ''G'I
Subject: Categorical Exclusion Approval for Federal Aid Project: Forsyth
County, SR 1672, Bridge No. 32 over Grassy Creek, Federal Aid No.
BRZ-1672(1), State Project No. 8.2622401, I. D. No. B-2036
Attached for your information is a copy of the project panning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the -Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A
(B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the
construction of the project.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
DOT will apply directly to NRCD for that permit when plans have been
developed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
Sincerely, V,0,1
;?, ?. L. J. ard, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. John Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. D. B. Waters
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

Forsyth County, Bridge No. 32
on SR 1672 over Grassy Creek
State Project No. 8.2622401
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1672(1)
B-2036
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS e
APPROVED:
ate
0
u

J. Warm, N. t:, manager
lanning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
z?z?s?9z ?
Date Nich as L. ra , P. E.
plL Division Administrator, FHWA
.i

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402.1890
IN REPLY REFER TO April 6, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199201532 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions)
Mr. L. J. Ward
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Reference your letter of March 20, 1992, whereby you informed us of your
plans to place fill material in the waters/wetlands of Grassy Creek associated
with replacement of Bridge No. 32 on S.R. 1672, Forsyth County, North
Carolina, State Project No. 8.2622401, I.D. No. B-2036.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization,
pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404
of the Clean Water Act, was provided for activities undertaken, assisted,
authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another
Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined,
pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing the Procedural Provisions
of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the activity, work or discharge
is categorically excluded from environmental documentation because it.is
included within a category of actions which neither individually nor
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and the
Office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval.
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
-2-
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the NWP authorization is reissued without modification or the activity
complies with any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. -If during
the 2 years, the NWP authorization expires or is suspended or revoked, or is
modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and
conditions of the NWP authorization, activities which have commenced (i.e.,
are under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the
NWP will remain authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months
of the date of the NWP's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. John Thomas, Raleigh Field
Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of-`Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
atural Resources
ost Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
A ?. S AIZ
zoo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLI
DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATI
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
March 20, 1992
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
a,30
-DIVISION -OF HIGHWAYS
17ET1',': -, u:, ,. .;
17%3TERQUrliif I _!
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: Categorical Exclusion Approval for Federal Aid Project: Forsyth
County, SR 1672, Bridge No. 32 over Grassy Creek, Federal Aid No.
BRZ-1672(1), State Project No. 8.2622401, I. D. No. B-2036
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A
(B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the
construction of the project.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
DOT will apply directly to NRCD for that permit when plans have been
developed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
Sincerely, I
?• DM
L. J. and
P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. John Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. D. B. Waters
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Forsyth County, Bridge No. 32
on SR 1672 over Grassy Creek
State Project No. 8.2622401
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1672(1)
B-2036
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
' ate
d

. j. wara, F. t., manager
lanning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Z17 ?
Date Nich as L. ra , P. E.
p/1-Division Administrator, FHWA
Forsyth County, Bridge No. 32
on SR 1672 over Grassy Creek
State Project No. 8.2622401
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1672(1)
B-2036
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
February, 1992
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Mic ele James
Project Planning Engineer
. ?,
714-
W4
Wayne E liott _ SEAL
Bridge Project Planning Enginee Unit Head i 775
ti •. !YCI N E?- •••
•• O
?'Jlv \A
1??H;.'Franklin Vick, oj_E?J
Asistant Manager anni
ng and Environmental
Forsyth County, Bridge No. 32
on SR 1672 over Grassy Creek
State Project No. 8.2622401
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1672(1)
B-2036
Bridge No. 32 has been included in the current Transportation
Improvement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial
environmental impacts are anticipated. The project has been classified as
a Federal "categorical exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 32 should be replaced at the existing location with a
pre-cast reinforced concrete box culvert as shown by Alternate lA (see
Figure 2). Only minimum approach work is required to tie the culvert to
the existing approaches.
The design speed will be 35 mph. A design exception will be required
and an advisory speed posting is warranted.
Preliminary hydrographic studies indicate that a triple 10' x 8' box
culvert should be provided. The length of the culvert should be adequate
to accommodate a three lane roadway, for future widening. The N. C.
Department of Transportation will improve the approaches to consist of a
24-foot pavement and 8-foot graded shoulders.
Traffic will be detoured along existing roads during the 2 month
construction period.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $ 255,000.
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the Transportation
Improvement Program, is $ 355,000.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique environmental
commitments are required for this project.
If the State Historic Preservation Officer determines that an
intensive archaeology survey is needed for this project, the survey will
be completed prior to construction.
Wetlands will not be disrupted by the project.
2
The federally endangered small-anthered bittercress is endemic to
seepages, streambanks and moist woods in Forsyth County. Flowers and
fruits appear in April and May. Due to seasonality and the need for
reproductive structures for positive identification, a scientific survey
will be conducted within the appropriate season.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1672 is classified as an urban collector in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is not part of the Federal Aid
System. The route is also designated as an existing minor thoroughfare in
the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Thoroughfare Plan (see Figure 5).
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1672 has a 20-foot pavement with
6-foot shoulders (see Figure 2). Vertical alignment is generally flat.
Bridge No. 32 is located on a 13-degree curve. The structure is situated
12 feet above the creek bed. The approaches are on embankments ranging up
to ±13 feet above natural ground. Land use in the immediate vicinity of
the bridge is residential. Development in the surrounding area is
industrial.
The current traffic volume of 10,000 VPD is expected to increase to
approximately 18,000 VPD by the year 2012. The projected volume includes
1% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 3% dual-tired vehicles (DT). The
speed limit is 45 MPH.
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1960. The
superstructure consists of a timber deck with I-beams. The substructure
is composed of timber caps, piles, and abutments.
Overall length is 42 feet. Clear roadway width is 25.1 feet. The
posted weight limit is 32 tons for single vehicles and Legal Gross Weight
for trucks with trailers.
Bridge No. 32 has a sufficiency rating of 6.8 compared to a rating of
100 for a new structure.
A single track of the Southern Railway crosses SR 1672 immediately
' west of the bridge. The crossing is protected by standard flashing light
?''°' signals.
?y Fourteen accidents were reported near Bridge No. 32 during the period
from February, 1988 to January, 1991.
School buses make eleven crossings daily.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Three alternative methods of replacing Bridge No. 32 were studied.
The design speed for the three alternates is 35 mph.
3
Alternate 1 would involve replacement of the bridge along the
existing roadway alignment with a cast-in-place reinforced concrete box
culvert (3 @ 10' x 8'). The road would be closed for approximately 5
months. Traffic would be maintained on existing local roads as shown in
Figure 1. This alternate would retain the present roadway alignment.
Alternate 1A (recommended) will involve replacement of the bridge
along the existing roadway alignment with a pre-cast reinforced concrete
box culvert (3 @ 10' x 8'). Road closure will be reduced to 2 months.
Traffic will be maintained on existing local roads as shown in Figure 1.
This alternate will retain the present roadway alignment.
Alternate 2 is identical to Alternate 1 except traffic is to be
maintained on-site with a temporary detour structure (3 @ 78" pipe)
located immediately downstream of the existing structure. The speed limit
for the on-site detour would be 30 mph.
Consideration was given to improving the alignment by reducing the
13-degree curve while maintaining traffic on the existing alignment. The
improved alignment would require the replacement of an additional
structure carrying the railroad over the creek. Therefore, a relocated
alignment was not considered to be a cost competitive alternate.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
SR 1672.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated.condition.
V. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated cost of the studied alternatives is as follows:
(Recommended)
Alternate 1 Alternate 1A Alternate 2
Structure $120,000 $128,000 $120,000
'• Roadway Approaches 33,000 33,000 33,000
Detour Structure &
Y Approaches - - 132,000
Structure Removal 10,000. 10,000 10,000
Engineering &
Contingencies 24,000 26,000 44,000
Right-of-Way,
Utilities 58,000 58,000 77,000
Total $245,000 $255,000 $416,000
4
VI. TRAFFIC DETOUR
The Division Engineer prefers
months. Approximately 1.8 miles of
for the average vehicle affected by
route is shown on Figure 1.
that road closure be limited to 2
additional travel will be necessary
road closure. The studied detour
A road-user analysis, based on a 5 month construction period, indi-
cates the cost of additional travel would be approximately $821,000. The
estimated cost of providing an on-site detour is $171,000 resulting in a
benefit-cost ratio of 5.0. This ratio indicates that maintaining traffic
on-site is justifiable. Replacing Bridge No. 32 with a precast box
culvert (recommended Alternate 1A) would reduce the road closure time to
months with an additional construction cost of only $10,000.
Provision of an on-site detour is not justifiable due to the availa-
bility of a suitable detour route. Detour roadways and bridges are
adequate to accommodate affected traffic during the construction period.
The Forsyth County School Transportation Director prefers that Bridge
No. 32 be closed to traffic for construction during the summer months.
The city of Winston-Salem concurs in a 2-month road closure.
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 32 should be replaced at its present location with a pre-
cast reinforced concrete box culvert. According to a preliminary hydro-
graphic study, a triple 10' x 8' precast concrete box culvert will
accommodate the flow of Grassy Creek at this point. The structure dimen-
sions may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows
of Grassy Creek as determined by further hydrologic studies.
The recommended improvements will include about 100 feet of improved
roadway approaches. A 24-foot pavement with 8-foot graded shoulders
will be provided on the approaches. The elevation of the new crossing is
expected to be approximately the same as the elevation of the existing
bridge. The length of the culvert should be adequate to accommodate a
proposed future 40-foot face-to-face curb and gutter cross section.
Based on the current average daily traffic, the potential for
increasing traffic volumes, and the placement of driveways and
intersections, the City of Winston-Salem has requested that the proposed
culvert be constructed to a width sufficient to accommodate a three lane
roadway which the city expects to construct within the next few years.
5
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replace-
ment of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a significant adverse effect on
the quality of the human or natural environment with the use of current
NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or
zoning regulation. No significant change in land use is expected to
result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated.
Right-of-way acquisition will be limited.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social,
economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
The project has been coordinated with the Soil Conservation Service
and is exempt from the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
This project requires compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended. Section 106 requires that
if a federally-funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect upon a
property listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an
opportunity to comment.
The project does not involve any Section 4(f) properties. There are
no publicly-owned parks, historic sites, recreational facilities, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance
in the vicinity of the project.
The area of potential effect of this project on historic
architectural resources was delineated, and all buildings within that area
were investigated. There are no National Register-listed or eligible
properties located within the area of potential effect. The State
Historic Preservation Officer was consulted and concurred with these
findings. See letter in Appendix.
The subject project lies in northern Winston-Salem, the Forsyth
County Seat. An industrialized county, it is located in the Piedmont
physiographic province in north-central North Carolina. The relief of the
county is characterized as gently sloping, with fairly broad ridges.
Wetland communities were identified in the project corridor on the
basis of low soil chroma values, hydrophytic vegetation and the presence
of hydrology or hydrological indicators, such as stained, matted
vegetation, high water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases and surface
roots.
Two plant communities were identified in the project area,
Man-dominated and Riparian Fringe. Riparian Fringe is classified as a
wetland community.
Anticipated plant community/wetland acreage impacts are summarized in
Table 1, on page 7.
Old field habitat and previously cleared areas give rise to mixed
herbaceous assemblages that have been allowed to revegetate naturally.
The vegetation of this community consists primarily of herbs, with a few
scattered trees. Prevalent plant species occurring in this disturbed
community include broom sedge (Andropogon virginicus), trumpet vine
(Cam psis radicans), Mexican tea (Chenopodium ambrosioides), dog-fennel
(Eupatorium cappilifolium), rabbit tobacco (Gnaphalium obtusifolium),
golden-rods (Solidago spp.), poke (Phytolacca americana), asters (Aster
spp.), chicory (Cichorium intybus) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans). Shrubby vegetation along the fringes of these areas include
black cherry. (Prunus serotina), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) and
winged sumac (Rhus copallina).
Other Man-dominated lands in the project area involve maintenance
activities that preclude natural plant succession. Maintenance activities
are associated with roadside shoulders and a maintained field planted with
turf (Fescue sp.).
A narrow fringe of vegetation borders Grassy Creek. Black willow
(Salix nigra) and tag alder (Alnus serrulata) form a low canopy under
which dewberry (Rubus trivialis), Joe-pye weed (Eupatorium fistulosum) and
smart-weed (Polygnum persicaria) may be found. Prevalent vines are
green-brier (Smilax lg auca), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and
moonseed (Menispermum canadense).
Impacts resulting from bridge replacement and the construction of a
detour would involve at least partial clearing of wetland areas. Wetland
habitat within the construction path would be eliminated where Grassy
Creek is crossed on fill and culverts. Causeway construction will result
in the addition of sediment to the aquatic system being crossed. Minimal
habitat loss and the modification of existing habitat will also be
associated with culvert placement in the channel.
Narrow strips of abandoned fields and disturbed mixed herbaceous
areas will be eliminated. Ecologically, these impacts are minimal.
Anticipated impacts for each alternate are summarized in Table 1.
Calculations are based on 80 feet of right-of-way.
Q'

Table 1. PLANT COMMUNITY/WETLANDS IMPACTS BY ALTERNATE
ALTERNATE
AREA OF IMPACTS (acres)
MD- RF--
Alternate 1
Recommended
Alternate 1A
Alternate 2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.2 0.1
"Man-dominated, -Riparian Fringe
Floodplain forests are home to
population. Other typical residents
(Ondatra zibethicus), mink (Mustela
virginiana).
a resurgent beaver (Castor canadensis)
are raccoons (Procyon lotor), muskrat
vison) and Virginia opossum (Didelphis
Birds sighted or heard in the area, include the robin (Turdus
migratorius), cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus
ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis) and American
goldfinch (Carduelis saltria .
Wetland communities are valuable habitat for reptiles and amphibians.
Amphibians in particular, are highly water dependent for completion of
larval stages in their life cycle. Some species are totally aquatic.
Spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), pickerel frog
(R. palustris), dwarf salamander (Eurycea quadridigitata), southern dusky
salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus), yellowbelly slider (Chrysemys
scripta), northern water snake (Nerodiea sipedon), and rat snake (Elaphe
obsoleta) are some of the reptiles and amphibians likely to be found in
the project area.
Fish species that are common to the study area are carp (Cyprinus
car io), channel catfish (Ictalurus catus), white suckers (Catostomus
commersoni), snail bullheads (Ictalurus brunneus), flat bullheads (I.
platycephalus), and a few brown bullheads (I. nebulosus). Redbreast
sunfish (Lepom?is auritus) and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) are
common game fish.
Loss of wildlife habitat, particularly for aquatic species and the
elimination of existing habitat are serious impacts that result from
dredging, filling, pile-driving operations, slope stabilization and land
clearing. These construction activities result in the direct loss of
benthic organisms and an increase in silt load in wetland environments.
Mobile aquatic organisms are better able to avoid impacts, and will have a
faster recovery rate from siltation, than those species that are filter
feeders and/or relatively immobile. The removal of benthic organisms
reduces the potential food supply for vertebrate and aquatic organisms.
8
Siltation has many adverse impacts on fish and benthos: decreases the
depth of light penetration inhibiting plant and algal growth, which is a
food source; clogs the filtration apparatus of filter-feeding benthos and
the gills of fish; buries benthic organisms on the bottom, cutting them
off from a food source; adversely modifies preferred benthic substrate;
and spoils downstream spawning beds for fish.
This bridge replacement project spans Grassy Creek. It is located in
the mid-region of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin. Mid-region segments
(4th-6th stream order) are characterized by increasing light penetration
through overhanging vegetation; wider channels (12 to 15 feet across);
sand/stone substrata with moderate flow; high input of autochthonous
matter.
Grassy Creek has a "best usage" classification of C. Class C
designates waters suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife and agriculture.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) N. C. Department
of Environmental Health and Natural Resources (NC-DEHNR), Division of
Environmental Management addresses long term trends in water quality at
fixed monitoring sites by the sampling of selected benthic
macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to very subtle changes
in water quality as indicated by the presence or absence of selected taxa.
The bioclassification rating primarily reflects the influence of chemical
pollutants. Sampling efforts conducted in October 1984 at Grassy Creek
and SR 1672, received a bioclassification of fair, primarily due to point
source dischargers in the area.
No waters classified as High Quality waters, Outstanding Resource
Waters, nor any segments of rivers classified under the federal Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act or the state Natural and Scenic Rivers Act, will be
impacted by the proposed project.
Bridge replacement with box culverts will allow normal flows.
Embankments and culverts will modify flow patterns in portions of the
wetlands close to the road, and hence modify the original character of the
habitat. Pools frequently created above or below openings of culverts,
trap sediment during periods of high water. Wetland flood control
capacity will be reduced proportionately by the amount of fill utilized in
wetlands.
During construction, erosion in combination with heavy rainfall, will
cause the loss of mineral and organic material from the soil surface
adding some sediment to the aquatic system causing temporary periods of
turbidity and overall decline in water quality.
Wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3. The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
takes jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or fill material into
these wetlands as authorized by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
9
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C 1344), a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge
of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States".
The subject project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion likely
to come under Provisions of Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. This
permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken,
assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part,
by another federal agency and that the activity is "categorically
excluded" from environmental documentation because it is included within a
category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions
are left to the discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the N.C.
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources will be required.
This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in a
discharge into waters for which a federal permit is required.
Compensatory mitigation is not required under a Nationwide Permit.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced
during construction activities to minimize unnecessary impacts to
stream/wetland ecosystems.
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. Information received from the US Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) reports the federally Endangered red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and small-anthered bittercress (Cardimine
micranthera) as occurring in Forsyth County.
The red-cockaded woodpecker has specific nesting and foraging habitat
requirements. Nesting habitat consists of pine or pine-hardwood (50
percent or more pine) stands over 60 years of age. Available foraging
habitat is defined as pine and pine-hardwood stands (50 percent or more
pine) over 30 years of age, contiguous to and within 0.5 miles of the
colony centroid. The 0.5 mile radius from the colony centroid represents
4 the foraging range of clans and may encompass areas outside of the project
area. No suitable habitat exists in the project area, thus the subject
project will not impact the species.
The federally Endangered small-anthered bittercress is endemic to
seepages, streambanks and moist woods in Forsyth and Stokes Counties. A
member of the mustard family, it is an erect, slender herb with a simple
or branched stem growing 2 to 4 decimeters tall. Crenate, basal leaves
are 1 to 2 cm long. Stem leaves are alternate and unlobed. Flowers are
small and have four white petals, six stamens and small, round anthers.
Fruits are slender siliques. Flowers and fruits appear in April and May.
Suitable habitat exists along the stream bank of Grassy Creek,
highlighting the possibility that the plant may be present. Due to
seasonality and the need for reproductive structures for positive
identification, a scientific survey will be conducted within the
appropriate season. -
10
The Candidate species nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) and bog turtle
(Clemmys muhlenbergi) may occur in the area. Candidate species are not
legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to
` any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database reports no state
protected species within the immediate project area. The bog turtle is
currently listed as a federal Candidate species. It is listed by the
state of North Carolina as Threatened and has a state protected status.
It occurs in bogs, wet pastures and wet thickets. Suitable habitat exists
in the project area although no surveys for the organism were conducted.
The presence or absence of this species can only be confirmed through a
scientific survey during the appropriate season.
The USFWS provided information on the Candidate (c) species
nestronia, that occurs in Mecklenburg County. Nestronia is listed by the
State of North Carolina as Threatened. It occurs in sandy, open woodlands
and creek borders. It is usually parasitic on oak and pine roots. The
presence or absence of this species will be confirmed through a scientific
survey during the appropriate season.
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted protection by the State
Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979, administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.
The project is located within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Forsyth County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this
project.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels and air quality will be insig-
nificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will be
temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be
done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of FHPM 7-7-3 (highway
traffic noise) and FHPM 7-7-9 (air quality) and no additional reports are
required.
Forsyth County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Regular Program. The approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area
is shown in Figure 4. The amount of floodplain area to be affected is not
considered to be significant.
11
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area.
Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of about the same
magnitude. The alignment of the project is perpendicular to the flood-
plain area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any
possible harm.
An individual permit will not be required from the Corps of Engineers
since the Nationwide Section 404 permit provisions are applicable, and the
provisions of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
MJ/plr

I
Ob
rt 4•;. ?.\ O?
?; .;.;. 1674
L 1 '. 1 rs 4000
1: _ I
J
1672
N 1676
?'. 2465
.71 t: :: ? ` S
'I/i? Ali!!
4 .05 922 Q#.C
N 3921 O
00
. 2o :06 1 72 h ?.,.
}? r 1784 Q; ^ `???
- ° BRIDGE No. 32
Zook - - - ?5
0
?.S' I PV T
1686 C
! cc0v14 -? 'o -
Rur$ Hall ]c v el
? 5 I. gS
67 Creek
an7eYvd e \' aJ SD
Bethams 65 at ertown r
F ?L. 61H I /
iennna,.-Pialft w 7 S ?S 5, SAVxer /
Lewisville I J4 42 /
-/ \\
T. , 3 I al '! ( 150 3
?Ilns o -
!Y n•Salm 661,
, r I 311
?;,? -
3 Clemmnn 1 y.;'?+?...? 4000
Hsdaie ?`°i ?? a7lbur¢ ?
LEGEND
STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE

• NORTH CAROLIN4
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 32
ON SR 1672
OVER GRASSY CREEK
FORSYTH COUNTY, B-2036 -
12/91 0 Milo 1/4 FIG. I
?I r.,
BRIDGE NO. 32
FORSYTH COUNTY
0
LOOKING EAST

LOOKING WEST
A

SIDE VIEW
FIGURE 3
03
CV)
LLJ
O F i :. ?= j> L t ?• ......
?• a
,
.' L
BRIDGE NO. 3
....... ..?:;?
L
?_ ;...• ? is ;???? r....._._ ? -? ? --
.1 A :1
t r ' i.• !,
A'
i
,
1 i
• r
.:?,.. 100 YEA.?,r: '?•: ': ? ?' ?', t , ,?, ; ,
R FLOOD
PLAIN RE 4
\ - -- - /I ---3
dAY
t.
CDC ,. N
EL
P,
,g71 -
1
BRIDGE No. 32
BEC CHU
9 DR
9? I
\ r , BYPASS
00 M [3 ct:
MOTOR
INDIANA AVE
NORTH POI '
i
RAN
s
00,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SEGMENT QF
WINSTON-SALEM/
FORSYTH COUNTY
THOROUGHFARE PLAN
r1 _
i Q mile I/2.
FIG. 5

APPENDIX
Jrs
.44
V
JAN 081992
Cf'Jt iC;?f OF .`.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
c??l
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
January 23, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Deppartment of Transportation
P.O. Box 26806
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Re: Replace Bridge No. 32 on SR 1672 over
Grassy Creek, Forsyth County, B-2036,
ER 92-7703
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of January 2, 1992, concerning the above project
We have reviewed the information and photographs regarding historic
structures located within the areas of potential effect. We concur with the
North Carolina Department of Transportation's finding that the Samuel A.
James House is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places since the house has undergone numerous character-altering changes.
Also, since the bridge itself is less than fifty years of age, it is not eligible for
listing in the National Register. We, therefore, concur that no National
Register-eligible structures are located within the area of potential effect.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
v
Jvi Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: L L" J. Ward
B. Church
109 East ones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807